The authority of the holder in due course to complete stamped instruments and the lack of a mandate for the drawer to fill up the entire instrument by himself.

ORDER :

K. Murali Shankar, J.

1. These revisions are directed against the impugned orders passed in CMP. Nos. 1758, 1759 and 2561 of 2016 in C.C. Nos. 57, 72 and 91 of 2016 by learned Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court @ Magisterial Level, Karur, filed under Section 243(2) Cr.P.C. r/w. Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 to send the disputed cheques to the Forensic Science Department for expert opinion.

2. The petitioner is an accused in the cases filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act before the Trial Court. Pending trial, the petitioner by invoking Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act, filed petitions to send the disputed cheques to the Forensic Science Department for comparison of the petitioner signature and the handwritten matters contained in the cheques and for an expert opinion. The trial Court, after enquiry, has passed the impugned orders dismissing the said petitions. Aggrieved by the said orders, the petitioner has come forward with the present revisions.

3. At the outset, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the trial Court has failed to understand the very prayer sought for by the petitioner.

4. A cursory perusal of the petitions filed under Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 by the petitioner would only reveal that the petitioner herself is not clear about the relief claimed. No doubt, the respondent has filed the counter statement, as if the petitioner has come forward with the above petitions to send the disputed cheques for comparing the signatures found in the cheques. The trial Court, on its part, has interpreted the prayer of the petitioner in such a way that he wanted to send the cheques for ascertaining the age of the signatures and the age of the writings in the cheque.

5. After hearing the learned counsels appearing for the petitioner and the respondent, this Court by putting a question to the counsel for the petitioner, to confirm my understanding of the petitioner's prayer and at last came to the light that the petitioner in order to prove that the handwritings found in the cheque are not that of her handwritings wanted to send the disputed cheques for comparing the handwritings found in the cheques with her admitted handwritings. Hence, it is clear that the petitioner has not sought for any relief with respect to her signature found in the disputed cheques and according to her, the dispute is only with regard to the handwritten matters found in the cheques.

6. The learned Judicial Magistrate by referring to Section 20 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, has observed that Negotiable Instruments Act permits the holder of the cheque either by himself or through any third party to fill up the blank cheques. It is necessary to refer Section 20 of the Negotiable Instruments Act hereunder for better appreciation;

"Inchoate stamped instruments: Where one person signs and delivers to another a paper stamped in accordance with law relating to negotiable instruments then in force in India, and either wholly blank or having written thereon an in complete negotiable instrument, he thereby gives prima facie authority to the holder thereof to make or complete, as the case may be, upon it a negotiable instrument, for any amount specified therein and not exceeding the amount covered by the stamp. The person so signing shall be liable upon such instrument in the capacity in which he signed the same, to nay holder in due course for such amount; provided that no person other than a holder in due course shall recover from the person delivering the instrument anything in excess of the amount instead by him to be paid to thereunder."

7. As per Section 20 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the holder in the due Course has every authority to complete the stamped instruments i.e., blank pronote and bill of exchange, delivered to him after properly signing therein by the maker of the instruments and as such Section 20 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, will have no